FOOTNOTES: 

[15] It is said that he used to tend these curls with very particular care, attaching small leaden weights to them at night to keep them in place,—­a custom which, I am informed, has in these days been revived by some dandies of the other sex.

[16] This very much bears out Burnet’s complaint against the Episcopal clergy in Scotland, which has been so strenuously denied by Creichton.  “The clergy used to speak of that time as the poets do of the golden age.  They never interceded for any compassion to their people; nor did they take care to live more regularly, or to labour more carefully.  They looked on the soldiery as their patrons; they were ever in their company, complying with them in their excesses; and, if they were not much wronged, they rather led them into them than checked them for them.”—­“History of My Own Time,” i. 334.

[17] “The Laird of Lag,” by Lieut.-Col.  Fergusson, pp. 7-11.

[18] His “History of the Sufferings of the Church of Scotland” was first published in 1721.

[19] This confusion was first pointed out by Aytoun in an appendix to the second edition of his “Lays of the Scottish Cavaliers.”

[20] Claverhouse to Linlithgow, December 28th, 1678.  These letters are all quoted from Napier’s book.  I have thought it better to give the date of the letter than the reference to the page.

[21] Claverhouse to Linlithgow, February 24th, 1679.

[22] George, eleventh Lord Ross, was joined with Claverhouse in the command of the western shires.  He had married Lady Grizel Cochrane, daughter of the first Earl of Dundonald, and aunt of the future Lady Dundee.

[23] Printed in Sharpe’s edition of Kirkton’s “History of the Church of Scotland.”  It differs in some, but not very important, points from the account printed in the same volume from Wodrow’s manuscripts.

CHAPTER IV.

The die was now fairly cast.  In a general rising lay the only hope of safety for Sharp’s murderers.  Desperate themselves, they determined to carry others with them along the same path, and by some signal show of defiance commit the party to immediate and irretrievable action.  The occasion for this was easily found.  May 29th, the King’s birthday, had been, as already mentioned, appointed as a general day of rejoicing for his restoration.  This had from the first given offence as well to those members of the Presbyterian Church who saw in his Majesty’s return no particular cause for joy, as to those more ascetic spirits who objected on principle to all holidays.  May 29th was therefore hailed as the day divinely marked, as it were, for the purpose on hand, a crowning challenge to the King’s authority.